Boston-Seattle play

[PS2Man]

Did anyone see the highlight from the Boston/Seattle game on Saturday?

Manny Ramirez originally at 1st base but was running to 3rd base on base hit. The ball was beat Manny to 3rd and he was tagged by the 3rd baseman. Right after the tag by the fielder the ball popped out of the glove, tipped around with the non-glove hand and finally caught in the air after a couple of bobbles. Manny was called out by the umpire.

Was the umpire correct to call Manny out? Could you give a rules reference to back up your claim. I think he was out by rule, but I have some doubt.

[Jurassic Referee]

The ump, Ron Kulpa, said after the game that the ball was held long enough before it came loose. Judgement call iow.

[scottyman51]

I disagree,but then again i'm a red sox fan so.....To me when the ball came out,and he next re-tagged Manny then Manny should have been safe.The ball never hit the ground so they said it could still be considered an out.

[Tim C]

Since we know that "voluntary release" is only in affect while a ball is "in flight" the only determining factor of this play is umpire judgement that the ball was secure when the tag was made.

Kulpa obviously thought that the ball was secure.

Pretty simple too me.

Regards,

[bluezebra]

"Voluntary release" is involved when tagging a base, not a runner. Such as on the pivot at 2B on a DP attempt. Or on a throw to 1B. Or when catching a batted ball.

Bob

[TussAgee11]

He had secured position during the duration of the tag. As he went to bring the glove to the hand, that's when the ball came out. Not really a transfer deal, but a "next thing he was trying to do" deal.

[Tim C]

""Voluntary release" is involved when tagging a base, not a runner. Such as on the pivot at 2B on a DP attempt. Or on a throw to 1B."

I disagree of course:

"Voluntary release"is ONLY considered on a BATTED BALL that is "in flight" . . . we kill this over-and-over everytime it comes up.

We even had documentation one time from Steve Mattingly who siad:

"I know the rule is clear but in a professional game it would be real hard to sell an out with the ball lying on the ground."

This answer was covering this play:

Ground ball to F3 who cleanly fields the ball and tosses to F1 covering first base.

F1 catches the ball three steps from the first base bag . . . clearly is in secure control and beats the B/R to first base by a step . . . B/R and F1 then collide and the ball winds up on the ground.

By rule, the B/R is out . . . in a professional game an ejection would follow if called that way.

Regards,

[UMP25]

It was Bruce's crew on that Crede play.

Using your logic, then, a player must always use his non-glove hand to remove the ball, because if he simply brings up his mitt to show the umpire he caught it and the ball pops out, it's a no catch.

Sorry, but if I judge the fielder had secure possession "long enough" to establish a catch and brings his mitt up to show me the ball, I'm ruling a catch.

[GarthB]

The "long enough" philosophy has been around in the MLB long enough to not be considered something thought of "on the fly."

[gsf23]

Originally Posted by UMP25

It was Bruce's crew on that Crede play.

Using your logic, then, a player must always use his non-glove hand to remove the ball, because if he simply brings up his mitt to show the umpire he caught it and the ball pops out, it's a no catch.

Sorry, but if I judge the fielder had secure possession "long enough" to establish a catch and brings his mitt up to show me the ball, I'm ruling a catch.

Sounds like a HTBT call, but if mearly lifting the glove to show me the ball causes it to pop out of the glove, I'd have to question just how secure the possession really was.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by PWL

I say he got the ball on the fly for certain. Was getting up to show ball and check runner on base. However, his throwing hand was no where near his glove. I just thought in his haste to get up and make another play he lost control of the ball.

I didn't see the play in question, but as I envision it in my mind's eye, it seems the act of making the catch was over and it was the subsequent play that caused the dropped ball. So, it was a catch.

It's similar to the rule-of-thumb on the transfer at second as part of a DP -- if the ball goes straight down, it was never a catch (R1 is safe at second); if the ball goes up and out, it was a catch (R1 is out) and a drop on the transfer.

[brumey1107]

Ok... so back to the Mariner / Boston play...

IMO, Beltre had secure possession of the ball and then went and tagged Manny - either on the shoulder or the helmet. This contact with Manny, which imo caused the ball to "pop" out of his glove and thus lead to the juggling of the ball by Beltre before he finally secured it.

So even as a Mariner fan (I don't believe I just admitted that ) I disagreed with the call.

The Mariner TV announcers seemed surprised at the call to... They even mentioned that because Manny didn't slide it helped the umpire call him out.

[UMP25]

Brumey, if it happened the way you said it did, then it would not be a tag. If a fielder tags a runner and while doing so the ball pops out, it's not a tag. I didn't see the play in question, so I do not know if this is how it happened. I'm commenting only on what you described.